31.10.12

Skyfall, not just another James Bond movie

Skyfall, not just another James Bond movie

M for Murder; Silva for Silver screen and Bond… James Bond, for what the extravagant bonds of the current materialistic life have contributed to the system of integral calculus in the course of time, from Shanghai to Makao and London. Apparently, his gun is as good as his bond. His name is as good as the spectators erase the ordinary past of thoughtful images in order to explore the great fate of the most famous secret agent in the history of cinema, read as another history, hysteria of “His Troy”…

But not in this case; Sam Mendes knows how to “play” the spectator. He is an agile administrator of patience, given that you expect from him until the end of the “Skyfall” comes. In a word made of do’s and don’ts, where first and foremost money “talks” and builds consciousness, the presence of James Bond -Daniel Craig- confirms its parallel absence. It stresses on the demand for another hero who is going to be a gun and a gunman at once. That is, it is necessary for Mendes to call upon a hero concerning the human nature proper. And here Silva -Javier Bardem -comes. Silva symbolizes the person beyond the weapons; he incarnates the ex defeated, the expiatory victim of the system being judged as unwanted by M-Judi Dench-. His role works in two senses: as participant in the plot and at the personal level, as an inner parallel psychic truth, with which the construction of the film a priori does not comply. Bond may be first in his class but Silva is gifted of a penetrative look. Whereas, Bond is not only controlled by the system but also perpetuates its power, Silva is the equivalent to the self-commitment and apparent independence.

Trying to deal with the meaning of guns in the movie, we could deduce that the gun appears at once as what should be taken, what should be expected and yet as what is dangerous to take. This happens because the reality of a gun consists that of a thing and so the thing itself given forges a bilateral bond; therefore, according to this deduction it is taken for granted that the issue of guns has to be considered as the other –bad this time- facet of the bond established between donor and recipient.

Additionally, Mendes invented the “Skyfall” residence in Scotland according to the logic he had to strike a match. The match-James Bond- existed. However, he had to light up the fire. On this occasion, no better place but a remote land of shadows could have ever been existed to fulfill his aim. At this point the film transfers the spectator to a microscopic theatrical condition, whereas the written name “Skyfall” leads to foster its self-relativity; a feeling of loss and oblivion pervades the atmosphere until the old man suggests Bond he leave immediately before conditions deteriorate. Anyway, the old man’s gesture of removing his hat is not just a pious one but tends to slow the action of that cruel scene down much more than simply empathizing with the fact of death. In conclusion, “Skyfall” is based on a witty script according to which James Bond is not conventionally in the mood for love and war but needs his other hero, Silva, so that a suspicion of theories regarding Oedipus Complex, in relation to castration- by the way, from M to Silva- and similar gender issues, arouses throughout the film. It is the so called ‘‘feel good entertainment’’ with exquisite interpretations including also that of the future M, Ralph Fiennes, and Naomie Harris; with some blood, Martini or beer and boom of guns…